Still Standing in the Schoolhouse Door

When the Brown decision was handed down 50 years ago, there
was celebration and escalated hopes and dreams for all who believed in
and loved freedom and democracy. Many thought that, at last, black and
white children would attend schools together, become friends, and grow
into enlightened citizens, and that the walls of segregation, racism,
and prejudice would come tumbling down. More importantly, the
visionaries and architects of Brown thought that desegregation of
public schools would have a domino effect, and that other barriers in
housing, employment, and higher education would collapse. When the
decision was rendered, the future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood
Marshall, who worked arduously for 20 years to dismantle segregation,
said, "We hit the jackpot." Later he recalled, "I was so happy I was
numb." Although Marshall and the NAACP admitted that there was much
work yet to be accomplished in implementing Brown, he told a reporter
in 1954 that school segregation would be eliminated nationwide within
five years.

Unfortunately, those dreams of equal opportunity were not to be
fully realized because dream-breakers literally stood in the
schoolhouse door. The icon seared into our consciousness is the image
of Gov. George C. Wallace of Alabama. His defiance, hatred, and
obstinate racist positions are indelibly etched in my own mind. On June
11, 1963, I was 200 miles away as Gov. Wallace made his stand at the
University of Alabama and reaffirmed his proclamation made at his
inauguration: "Segregation now. Segregation tomorrow. Segregation
forever."

Fortunately, George Wallace and people like him are no longer
physically standing in schoolhouse doors. Yet there are dream-breakers,
reminiscent of Wallace, who are still among us. The mandate to proceed
with "all deliberate speed" has stalled, and the dream of equal
educational opportunity even now appears elusive. Two factors, I
believe, represent the greatest disappointments of Brown: the
increase in segregation in schools, and the continuing decline in the
school achievement of African- American and Latino students.

The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University and the Educational
Testing Service provide some sobering statistics on desegregation.
Segregation has been on the rise in the last decade, despite rapid
increases in the number of students of color. U.S. Census Bureau data
indicate that the white population in the United States is declining,
while 40 percent of the students in our schools come from ethnically
diverse backgrounds. However, this growing diversity does not foretell
growing integration. The average white student attends a school that is
80 percent white. The average African-American student attends a school
that is 67 percent African-American. The most segregated of all
minority groups are Latinos. Seventy-five percent of Latinos attend
mostly minority schools. Adding to the complexity of this picture is
the fact that not only are these schools segregated, but also the
students of color who attend them are overwhelmingly poor.

That our schools are still segregated is disturbing enough. More
troubling is the fact that far too many African-American and Latino
students in these mostly segregated schools are performing poorly. One
of the most trenchant areas of concern among educators and researchers
is the test-score gap, or the general tendency for white and Asian
students to score higher on standardized measures of achievement than
their black and Hispanic peers.

This test-score gap is revealed in the fact that white students, on
average, score 20 to 30 points higher than their black and Hispanic
peers. But the importance of the discrepancy becomes even more apparent
when considering what a 30-point difference means for the average black
or Hispanic student. Seventeen-year-old black and Hispanic students
have skills in reading, mathematics, and science that are similar to
those of a 13-year old white student.

Credible research has documented variables that explain why students
of color in mostly segregated schools continue to fall behind their
white and Asian peers. Residential segregation, supported by decades of
reversals of school busing cases, has contributed to hypersegregation,
particularly in medium to large urban areas. Housing patterns are not
the sole explanation, however. As census data reveal, the suburbs are
now over one- fourth minority. The other contributing factor to school
segregation is the increase in private school enrollment by white
students. White private school enrollment in 2000 was comparable to
that in 1968.

The ETS recently published the results of a review of thousands of
pieces of empirical research in an effort to determine what we know
about achieving a quality education for all children. The researchers
identified 14 correlates of achievement that they claim are
"unambiguous," including, for example, highly qualified and experienced
teachers; a challenging, academic curriculum; safe and well-funded
schools; involved parents; prenatal care; preschool literacy
experiences; and a decrease in the number of female-headed
households.

None of these factors should come as a surprise. We have known about
the salience of these issues since President Lyndon B. Johnson’s
Great Society and War on Poverty programs in the 1960s. Why have we, as
a nation, ignored them? Why were the promises of Brown never
fully realized? Who or what is standing in the schoolhouse door today?
I contend that the most disturbing dream-breaker of Brown is the
lack of moral leadership in this country, particularly at the national
level. Although the federal government has no legal or constitutional
responsibility for educational issues, the fact of the matter is that
the federal government, and particularly the courts, have always been
the dream- keepers for generations of Americans in search of equal
opportunities.

Political leaders are now playing a horrible shell game with the
lives of poor and minority students, and have eliminated or underfunded
most federal legislative and judicial efforts aimed at decreasing
segregation and the achievement gap. The No Child Left Behind Act is a
prime example of the national public relations strategy that uses
children as political pawns. When taken at its face value, the law
looks promising. Who would take offense at a mandate requiring states
to be accountable for the achievement of poor students, special-needs
students, and students of color?

On closer review, however, critics have unveiled a disingenuous law
that pledges to raise 100 percent of all students to proficient levels
in reading and math by 2014, without any attention to fully funding the
law or providing other needed assistance to children and their families
in areas such as health care, employment, and pre- and after-school
care. The No Child Left Behind law ignores the best practices of
measurement and evaluation, and makes a mockery of the definition of a
"highly qualified teacher." States can define the criteria for a
qualified teacher. In my own state of Georgia, anyone with a
bachelor’s degree who passes Praxis tests in basic skills,
subject matter, and principles of teaching and learning can teach. No
college training in education or field experience is required. Texas
has passed a similar plan.

Such inadequately prepared teachers will not be found in the
suburban schools of middle-class students. They will be in the schools
with the most vacancies—segregated rural and urban schools with
large numbers of low-income minority students. If, after several years
of trial and error and on-the-job training, these novice teachers
become effective and accomplished, the data suggest they will leave
their poor, urban, or rural schools and transfer to more lucrative and
less challenging assignments.

We will not and cannot achieve our national vision by ignoring
children with broken dreams and broken promises. Somehow, we must start
to think of our future as inextricably linked to the success of poor
and minority students, who remain the dispossessed heirs of Jim Crow.
Fifty years after Brown, it’s clear that we have the
knowledge, skills, and technology to make the promises of that landmark
ruling a reality. What we lack are visionary and courageous leaders
with generous hearts.

Ron Edmonds, the trailblazer of the school reform movement, noted 35
years ago that we already know all we need to know to provide a quality
education for all children. "Whether we do or do not," he said,
"depends upon how we feel about the fact that we have not done it."

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.